The Original Mary

If anything, it is *more* difficult for Danes to reverse a charge than it is for Americans. In fact, according to this article, the American chargeback protection is *unique* to the USA.

"Under German law, e.g., the card issuer may ignore any defenses or claims of the cardholder arising out of her transaction with the merchant. The cardholder is liable for the amount charged when she authorised payment. If the cardholder ever receives the goods she paid for, if these goods are defective, or if there are any other problems in the transaction between cardholder and merchant does not concern the card issuer. It is a problem to be resolved solely among the cardholder and the merchant. Due to the relatively small value of consumer transactions, legal remedies, such as court action, that may be available to the consumer in theory, are hardly ever efficient in practice. Therefore, as a matter of fact, effective consumer redress too often does not exist. Arguably this absence of effective consumer redress is one main reasons responsible for the lack of consumer confidence in the electronic marketplace.

The situation in the U.S. is very different. As indicated above the use of credit cards is mainly regulated by TILA and Regulation Z. Unlike in Germany, these regulations go beyond protecting the consumer from liability for unauthorised use of her credit card or credit card data. Regulation Z's billing error resolution procedure allows the consumer to contest a billing statement that reflects a charge for property or services not accepted by the consumer or not delivered to the consumer as agreed. If this error is ascertained in the resolution procedure, the card issuer has to credit the consumer's account with the disputed amount (chargeback). One important consequence of this procedure is that it protects the consumer against being charged for goods or services that she never received or that were otherwise not delivered or performed as agreed. The procedure affords cheap and effective redress to consumers who did not get what they paid for with their credit card.

This chargeback mechanism in U.S. credit card regulation is unique in two regards. It does not exist anywhere else in the world, and even in the U.S. it does not apply to any other payment system. While the credit card regulations in most countries are similar with respect to unauthorised payments, they are not with respect to transactions that go wrong although a payment has actually been authorised by the consumer. Under the laws of other countries the cardholder may be charged by the card issuer regardless of whether she actually receives the goods she paid for."
http://216.239.33.100/search?q=cach...&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

duff

Under German law?

Denmark = Germany?

Chargebacks are not common in Denmark, the casinos are accusing Danes of Chargebacks because of the large group of bonushunters.

I know from my webmaster stats that Danes are loosing more than winning at the casinoes.




[This message has been edited by duff (edited 07-18-2002).]

The Original Mary

Trust me, I am not confusing Denmark with Germany.

This particular excerpt describes German regulations in detail, then contrasts them with American regulations. Note the statement that the American rights are unique.

It can be therefor assumed that the Danish situation is more similar to the German one than the American one.

In a similar discussion at Casinomeister, the casino operator is using as "evidence" a statement from their processor. Said processor, curiously enough, appears to specialize in online casino transactions.

I have yet to see any Danish credit card regulations, credit card terms, or studies of Danish commerce that supports online casino claims that Danes do more chargebacks than, say, Canadians.